There is outrage because Appleinsider is an Apple gadget site, this crap isn't about gadgets at all. Frankly it is diving into peoples personal lives for no good reason. It is objectionable in the same way that diving into Steves health issues is objectionable. Of course many don't see the ugliness of that either, to which we can credit to being brought up in leftist households.

Apple's leadership is of profound interest to anyone interested in the company. Everyone interested in Apple is very interested in who might one day replace Jobs. You seem hung up on one aspect of the profile on Cook, and from your comments this appears to be because you hate gays. That's your problem, not one for AI, Apple, Cook, or gays.

Quote:

Appleinsider simply isn't the place for this. If one of the secretaries at Apple had a history of attending gang bangs would you want it detailed here? Seriously? For some it might be very interesting but let's face it there are plenty of sites on the net for that.

I would certainly hope so, but I don't understand the connection between wild sex at Apple and Cook being profiled as next in line at Apple.

Quote:

Except Obama has none of those qualities. That has nothing to do with hate it is just a reflection of reality. What is sad here is that you use this forum and pathetic thread to try to elevate this man beyond what he is capable of. I'm not sure if you are trying to pull focus away from the issue at hand or what. As to the issue at hand what does gay sex have to do with Apple gadgets? That in a nut shell is the problem with this thread.

Only a bigot could say that the president who stood up to nothing but months of lock step partisan obstructionism by nearly every individual Republican, and still passed item after item in his promised agenda, is not strong and competent. Even if you are politically opposed to Obama's interests, you can't deny that he has done more, in more difficult environment, that any recent president. Bush had the Democrats fall in line under war hysteria (minor stated accomplishments, easy circumstances), Clinton accomplished little of his stated agenda (minor stated accomplishments, difficult circumstances).

If Obama hadn't accomplished so much, the current Republican majority in the House wouldn't be symbolically voting to undo things they lack the power to actually undo, just to be ineffectual and weak in a pretense of being strong and powerful.

Quote:

By definition they are defective, just like anybody else with a birth defect. The great shame here is that any sort of birth defect associated with sex gets classed differently than any other birth defect. There is no justification for that. You can't go around treating people as leapers simple because of an accident of birth.

Referring to people you have been taught to hate as "defective" is simply ignorant. Nobody with an education considers people who fall outside of religiously defined gender role stereotypes to be "defective." I would say your opinion is defective. And how exactly should one "treat lepers"? With disgust and hate, like the middle ages, or with medical care, like liberal intellectuals would? (And I assume you mean leper, as in someone with leprosy, as opposed to "leapers," somebody who jumps.)

Quote:

As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.

There is no discussion of Cook's "sex life" in the article. It's pretty commonly known among people who are gay who other gays are. It's only a source of shame and fear among people who cultivate shame and fear in their communities. Humans are naturally interested in other's gender and role identity, which is why there's nothing shameful or scary about Valentine's Day. It's not about "sex life," it's about identity and relationships, very positive things.

I imagine you're rather old, but it's not too late to let go of hate and prejudice and simply accept other people for who they are.

I totally disagree, this is absolutely offensive. Whether Cook is gay or not is totally irrelevant. AI speculating and or discussing whether he is or isn't gay is offensive and absolutely should not be considered journalism in any respect. Either he is qualified for his job (obviously he is) or he is not.

AI isn't speculating that Tim Cook is gay, they are just reporting that Valleywag is profiling him as such.

As for those offended by AI "outing" him, I remind you that AI is not reporting him as being gay Valleywag is. And seeing that there has been no official confirmation from Cook himself he is hardly "out".

I don't give a damn if he's gay, and the fact that is being reported is inappropiate. I think I and just about everyone else on the board only care about his ability to lead Apple if Steve can't come back.

Where are the ''most powerful openly straight cock of the walk'' headlines?

It's none of my business or anyone else's business who an executive's private life is or is not. Grow up is right.

We don't need a headline for "the most powerful openly straight cock of the walk" because that's a) not outside the norm enough to be interesting, but more more importantly, b) we all know that's Steve Jobs.

I mean come one, Jobs is pure billionaire pussy magnet, and yet he has a hot wife that he's faithfully married to and happy with. Can't get more straight up cock of the walk than that.

In our country, we don't even allow gays to marry, let alone have basic equal rights in terms of taxes and other benefits. So that in itself makes being gay a newsworthy story.

Also, Cook lives in the Bay Area of San Francisco. He's not exactly afraid of being outed. Maybe if he were an actor practicing Scientology, or living in Omaha, but no, not running Apple.

In a perfect world we wouldn’t, but an inevitable part of civil rights movements is to point out accomplishments from groups of people previously deemed undesirable or incapable in some way by the majority of society.

In 2009 we commended Sonia Sotomayor for being the first Hispanic and third woman appointed to the Supreme Court Justice. I don’t think the average person would think pointing this out this achievement is a horrible thing and it’s surely an inspiration to many that classify themselves as such.

Unless there is some “outing” or it’s a a falsified statement I see no problem with someone making this general point to point out the success of a person who belongs to a group trying to achieve social acceptance.

Your comment and others like it are what we can hope for in the future. IOW, these rights should seem so natural that the idea of pointing them out would make us scratch our heads as to why it’s being stated in the first place.

The Sotomayor analogy only works because she identifies herself as Hispanic. She embraces it, vs. say, Tiger Woods, who invented the whole Cablinasian thing to try to prevent people from boxing him in to a mold he didn't choose to be identified with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by REC

It's true. We do live in a country where gays don't always have basic rights, like the right to marry. This is our country. It should be talked about.

I live in a flyover state where gays do have the right to marry. (Note to the outside world: the state didn't implode, straight families like mine didn't automatically self destruct and, after the first week or two, it became a total non issue.)

That said, there is enough of a stigma and enough discrimination that you still don't "out" someone who hasn't already self-identified themselves as gay. It just isn't done.

How odd is it that someone from the middle of the country would have to explain that to left coasters...

There is outrage because Appleinsider is an Apple gadget site, this crap isn't about gadgets at all. Frankly it is diving into peoples personal lives for no good reason. It is objectionable in the same way that diving into Steves health issues is objectionable. Of course many don't see the ugliness of that either, to which we can credit to being brought up in leftist households.

Being gay isn't a health issue, nor some kind of tabloid shame. Cook isn't "out" in the sense that he declares his sexual orientation when he walks in the room, but it's not a big secret.

Quote:

Appleinsider simply isn't the place for this. If one of the secretaries at Apple had a history of attending gang bangs would you want it detailed here? Seriously? For some it might be very interesting but let's face it there are plenty of sites on the net for that.

You see being gay as analogous to promiscuity or group sex. How charmingly 19th century of you.

Quote:

Except Obama has none of those qualities. That has nothing to do with hate it is just a reflection of reality. What is sad here is that you use this forum and pathetic thread to try to elevate this man beyond what he is capable of. I'm not sure if you are trying to pull focus away from the issue at hand or what. As to the issue at hand what does gay sex have to do with Apple gadgets? That in a nut shell is the problem with this thread.

Hmmm, I think I'm starting to get the big picture. And how is being gay equal to talking about gay sex? Steve Jobs is straight, does that mean every time he gets mentioned Apple Insider is indulging in talk about heterosexual sex?

Quote:

By definition they are defective, just like anybody else with a birth defect. The great shame here is that any sort of birth defect associated with sex gets classed differently than any other birth defect. There is no justification for that. You can't go around treating people as leapers simple because of an accident of birth.

Yep. You're completely off the rails. Fortunately, you belong to shrinking minority of hard core bigots.

Quote:

As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.

Where has there been a discussion of anyone's sex life, except in your fevered imagination?

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.

Also, Cook lives in the Bay Area of San Francisco. He's not exactly afraid of being outed. Maybe if he were an actor practicing Scientology, or living in Omaha, but no, not running Apple.

But he's not just someone from the Bay Area anymore. He has to do business in places like Omaha (where there is a good Apple store OBTW) and across the entire world where they sometimes take a far dimmer view of gays than they do in Omaha.

Does anyone think that Fox News wouldn't lead every Apple story with "the gay CEO of Apple" (or whatever) from here on out? Why polarize where it's not necessary or productive?

IMO, this is the insidious side of the activist community (possibly like the author of this so-called "story"). It never occurs to them that the in-your-face approach is why Prop 8 in California passed, or why Prop 19 failed.

This article is at once kind of heartwarming, and totally unnecessary. I really don't care about the sexuality of the Apple executives. It's not a relevant topic. There are plenty of gay executives out there. What are the implications? None.

As you know, the Valleywag story includes references from The Wall Street Journal, CNN, The New York Times to highlight his career CV and personal and professional attributes, yet when it comes to discussing his orientation -- the lead element of your storyline -- you chose to rely on Valleywag's crack investigative news team. It posits,

If Cook is in a long term partnership, he's kept it well hidden. Given his brutal work schedule, though, it's hard to imagine how he'd find time. Still, he's got enough experience to have developed some preferences; our tech executive source claims Cook is into Asian guys, a tidbit that prompted another tech observer, with whom we shared the item, to propose some strategic matchmaking that would pair Cook with Google hotshot Ben Ling. It's an inspired match: Perhaps the coupling could build a bridge between two corporate nemeses.

If you want to pay tribute to the man -- a stalwart senior executive retaking the reigns to an iconic and industry powerhouse, who happens to be gay (allegedly) -- then please afford him and the orientation the decency to corner your story beyond a hyperlink pointing to an unnamed, unverified, "tech executive" source.

If you're simply posting a précis of a post on another site, do you want to hinge a key adjective to the story title on an unidentified and unverified source? If so, then I'll prepare myself for more Fleet Street headlines.

A little piece of the Apple love inside of me just died. Guess it's time to find something else to love in the tech world.

Just as a point of reference, there are about as many gays around you every day as there are left handed people. (Note: not the same people, but the overall numbers are very similar.) So if you're afraid to be associated with something that might have gays involved, look to see how many left-handed people there are at the monster truck rally or death metal or country music concert or even your local church. It's about 11%, +/- whatever the fraction of a percent the statistical margin for error may be.

This does make my point about needlessly polarizing people; it is completely counterproductive: Avenged110 just made my case better than I ever could.

"I'm proud of the fact that I'm gay and that some of the guys who work with me are gay," he added, "but at the end of the day all that matters is that we put stuff out there that's high-quality and that makes people happy."

Gay means Happy and Happy means Gay!

I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.

Just as a point of reference, there are about as many gays around you every day as there are left handed people. (Note: not the same people, but the overall numbers are very similar.) So if you're afraid to be associated with something that might have gays involved, look to see how many left-handed people there are at the monster truck rally or death metal or country music concert or even your local church. It's about 11%, +/- whatever the fraction of a percent the statistical margin for error may be.

This does make my point about needlessly polarizing people; it is completely counterproductive: Avenged110 just made my case better than I ever could.

I'm not sure what point you're making. On the one hand there's the idea that "outing" Mr. Cook is uncool, which, sure, although my impression is that his sexuality isn't exactly a secret. It's not like he's a deeply closeted Republican politician, or something.

But on the other hand you seem to be saying that prominent gay people should remain closeted because ambient bigotry will cause problems for their companies, which I totally disagree with. That's simply capitulating to that bigotry, and allowing it to dictate the terms of people's lives.

Knowing that Tim Cook is gay isn't "needlessly polarizing", the people who have a problem with that are needlessly polarized. It's an extremely important distinction.

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.

By definition they are defective, just like anybody else with a birth defect. The great shame here is that any sort of birth defect associated with sex gets classed differently than any other birth defect. There is no justification for that. You can't go around treating people as leapers simple because of an accident of birth.

Well I'm a gay man, and no, I'm not offended by the headline, but yes, it is a silly story... Of course Tim Cook is gay. who cares? and furthermore, did anyone really not know that already?

..

Well I didn't know and frankly I couldn't give a flying xxx if he or steve jobs is gay, bi or an aardvark fancier to be honest. How is one supposed to know he is gay? You not implying you can tell by looking I hope?

If this was a story about the most powerful minority or female CEO in the US, everyone would be proud that Apple was getting this attention. (How many stories did we hear about Carly Fiorina when she took over at HP?)

This is why this story is powerful and needed, especially to many young gay kids who need good role models. Seeing one of the most successful companies have a gay man treated as an equal by Steve Jobs and the rest of the executive team is a powerful message. It also continues to breakdown stereotypes.

My only hope is he is out and this didn't 'out' him to the world against his wishes.

I'm not sure what point you're making. On the one hand there's the idea that "outing" Mr. Cook is uncool, which, sure, although my impression is that his sexuality isn't exactly a secret. It's not like he's a deeply closeted Republican politician, or something.

But on the other hand you seem to be saying that prominent gay people should remain closeted because ambient bigotry will cause problems for their companies, which I totally disagree with. That's simply capitulating to that bigotry, and allowing it to dictate the terms of people's lives.

Knowing that Tim Cook is gay isn't "needlessly polarizing", the people who have a problem with that are needlessly polarized. It's an extremely important distinction.

I said outing someone who may not want to be outed was uncool. That's true whether it's the far right doing the outing or whether it's an activist in the gay community that's doing the outing.

It was Daniel Eran Dilger's linkbait to generate page views for AI that was designed to be polarizing. And self serving. Maybe they can change their domain name to TMZInsider.com instead?

I thought that Valleywag article was reprehensible. Cook's sexuality is Cook's business and nobody else's. If he wants to come out then good for him and I'd admire his courage. The fact he hasn't is his personal decision. His outing all over the internet definitely isn't his personal decision.

So if this was addressing a different minority, and said the "most powerful woman," the "most powerful black man," or any other category of people who are less likely to be promoted in society because of prejudice, would you also be feigning outrage?

A "powerful black" man or a "powerful woman" are both members of "visible minorities" and as such don't have the same "decisions" to make re: their status. They have already been "outed", as it were. A gay person may or may not want their status to be made public. That is their decision to make .... not ours. A person's sexual orientation is none of our business. It is entirely up to Mr. Cook to decide "how public" he wants to be with this. AI has shown no respect at all for his privacy and should be rightly "taken to task" for this. This is the sort of thing I would expect to see in The National Enquirer .... but not in any sort of "professional news reports.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archos

It is offensive that you would try to censor such a message. Do you prefer gays begin depicted as a class of people who have to hide their identity lest anyone finding out they are "defective" or something? THAT'S offensive.

There is a HUGE difference between censorship and a respect for an individuals privacy. I am always amazed at people like you who show no respect to others and hide their classless action in the "flag of censorship" .... as 'tho we had the "right" to discuss any one's life we wanted to. We don't.

Blowing out another person's candle does not make our candle burn brighter - author unknown

At least he's doing something worthwhile instead of fashion or hairdressing or telling women what they should to do to be more attractive.

Seriously though, there needs to be more info on gay people that do other things besides the above to counter that stereotype! I can't stand watching all that next fashion/model/bimbo-superstar crap on TV with all the flamboyant gay men. Imagine if you're gay and you don't have a great haircut (dyed a flamboyant colour), super-snazzy outfits or a tight body... it can be tough.

I'm a gay web developer and I work for one of the most recognizable companies in the world. This article did make me pause for a second and think why does it matter if the man is gay? However you made me change my mind.

As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.

I was reading your post and thinking, "wow, I can't believe I'm agreeing with you" .... then I read this: By definition they are defective....
Surely you can't be serious with this statement. Tell me, are redheads "defective"? ... Blondes? .... blues eyes? .... short people ..... 7' tall NBA hopefuls?. Just what exactly, in your eyes, makes for a "non defective" person. Maybe you should rethink your posititon .... or did I just not understand what you were trying to say?

Blowing out another person's candle does not make our candle burn brighter - author unknown

This is not an Apple gadget site, this is an Apple site.. Any and all things related to Apple have been discussed and reported on this site, both rumors and facts.. I see no harm done here as nothing slanderous was published... And yes, I'm gay..

Just because it wasn't slanderous doesn't mean it wasn't potentially embarrassing. There is such a thing as being concerned for a person's right to privacy.

Blowing out another person's candle does not make our candle burn brighter - author unknown

There is outrage because Appleinsider is an Apple gadget site, this crap isn't about gadgets at all. Frankly it is diving into peoples personal lives for no good reason. It is objectionable in the same way that diving into Steves health issues is objectionable. Of course many don't see the ugliness of that either, to which we can credit to being brought up in leftist households.

Appleinsider simply isn't the place for this. If one of the secretaries at Apple had a history of attending gang bangs would you want it detailed here? Seriously? For some it might be very interesting but let's face it there are plenty of sites on the net for that.

Except Obama has none of those qualities. That has nothing to do with hate it is just a reflection of reality. What is sad here is that you use this forum and pathetic thread to try to elevate this man beyond what he is capable of. I'm not sure if you are trying to pull focus away from the issue at hand or what. As to the issue at hand what does gay sex have to do with Apple gadgets? That in a nut shell is the problem with this thread.

By definition they are defective, just like anybody else with a birth defect. The great shame here is that any sort of birth defect associated with sex gets classed differently than any other birth defect. There is no justification for that. You can't go around treating people as leapers simple because of an accident of birth.

As to censorship that is BS in this case. Most of us come to AI to read up on Apple hardware, software and rumors. It isn't the place to discuss anybodies sex life, in that regard AI has failed miserably to excercise editorial control. Frankly this whole thread should be pulled because it pollutes the forum with crap that has nothing to do with Appleinsiders mission.

If you want editorial control go to China you ignorant bigot. You are the one who was born with a brain defect.

AI isn't speculating that Tim Cook is gay, they are just reporting that Valleywag is profiling him as such.

As for those offended by AI "outing" him, I remind you that AI is not reporting him as being gay Valleywag is. And seeing that there has been no official confirmation from Cook himself he is hardly "out".

Ahhh, so AI is not "starting the rumor" ..... they're just "spreading it". In that case .... all is well ..... NOT!

Blowing out another person's candle does not make our candle burn brighter - author unknown

But he's not just someone from the Bay Area anymore. He has to do business in places like Omaha (where there is a good Apple store OBTW) and across the entire world where they sometimes take a far dimmer view of gays than they do in Omaha.

Does anyone think that Fox News wouldn't lead every Apple story with "the gay CEO of Apple" (or whatever) from here on out? Why polarize where it's not necessary or productive?

This is actually the most relevant post in this entire topic if you ask me.

I have a few gay friends, and personally I feel like a gay CEO should be a total non-issue. However, many people (and countries) don't see it that way. In big parts of the world, homophily is still a very big taboo.
And many of those areas where it's taboo are important growth markets for Apple.

I wonder how this will affect Apple's growth in areas such as China and the Middle East. I really cannot imagine those Saudi oil sheikhs buying $2000 laptops from a company that has a "sinfull" CEO. Maybe they'll even ban Apple products... I really hope I'm wrong though, as to me, Tim Cook seems like an extremely capable guy that would be a very worthy successor for Steve Jobs, and I wish him all the best in running this company.

And I, together with many of the people here, hope that one day being gay will be a complete non-issue all over the world.